On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 06:40, Brian McBride wrote: > At 14:12 07/03/2002 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote: > [...] > > >I consider these done; > > > >2002-02-25#12 DanC > >Contact RFC 2396 editors to confirm that RDF will use a different > >algorithm for xml:base > >2002-02-25#15 DanC > >Confirm with RDF 2396 that xml:base="http://example.org"> decision is > >correct > > Thanks Dan. Could you refer me to a description of the response please. The discussion is recorded in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20020225-f2f/irclog-2002-02-26.html starting with [08:35:00] DanC LMM: yes, re / question, the text of 6.H isn't quite clear... thru [09:19:14] DanC this would require enhancing our test infrastructure to take another input. I think I presented it to the WG as a whole; I think Jeremy grokked... I think the result was some actions to change test cases and stuff in the syntax spec... yeah: [10:03:50] mdean_ ACTION: jeremy review error2 and error3 test cases In short, #15 was easy; yes, we're correct. #12 is more subtle, but I think we're agreed what to do and Jeremy is doing it. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 19:00:49 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:31:41 UTC